School Teachers' Review Body Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Department for Education

School Teachers' Review Body

Michael Gove Excerpts
Wednesday 5th December 2012

(12 years ago)

Written Statements
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Michael Gove Portrait The Secretary of State for Education (Michael Gove)
- Hansard - -

The “21st Report of the School Teachers’ Review Body” (STRB) is being published today. Its recommendations cover the issues that were referred to it in February 2012. These were about reforming teachers’ pay in order to raise the status of the profession and contribute to improving the standard of teaching in our schools.

I am grateful for the careful consideration which the STRB has given to these important matters and fully support the guiding principles that it has used as the basis for its recommendations. Copies of the STRB’s 21st report are available in the Vote Office, the Printed Paper Office and the Libraries of both Houses, and online at: http://www.education.gov.uk and http://www.ome.uk.com/.

The STRB has made recommendations on a pay framework that seeks to raise the status of the profession, support professional development, and reward individuals in line with their contribution to improving pupil outcomes, enabling the most successful teachers to progress faster than at present on the basis of annual appraisal. It proposes greater autonomy for schools to set teachers’ pay within that broad national framework, alongside increased accountability for high professional standards and contribution to pupil progress.

I am grateful to the STRB for these recommendations and, subject to the views of consultees, I intend to accept all the key recommendations. I also intend to accept the more detailed recommendations and the consequential recommendations, but wish to give notice that there are some areas to which I will wish to return in a future remit for further consideration by the STRB. This will include the application of a 1% pay uplift for the two years following the end of the pay freeze, as set out by the Chancellor in the 2011 autumn statement. The statutory minima and maxima for classroom teachers’ pay will be uprated by 1% in each year 2013-14 and 2014-15. Schools are free to determine the extent of pay uplifts to teachers within the statutory minima and maxima, and will be able to provide an uplift of 1%, in line with any overall uplift in pay in the public sector, if they so choose.

As regards the recommendations on implementation, I broadly accept these in principle, but will want to consider them further before reaching firm conclusions on whether they represent the most effective and practical way of implementing the key recommendations.

My detailed response contains further information on the matters.

Annex to written ministerial statement

School Teachers’ Review Body’s (STRB’s) recommendations and response from the Secretary of State for Education.

[The following sets out the full set of recommendations from the STRB as published in the 21st report (CM 8487) on 5 December 2012, together with the response from the Secretary of State for Education. The STRB’s recommendations below.]

Michael Gove Portrait The Secretary of State for Education (Michael Gove)
- Hansard - -

The 21st report of the STRB is being published today. It covers matters referred to the STRB in February 2012. Copies are available in the Vote Office, the Printed Paper Office and in the Libraries of both Houses and online at: http://www.education.gov.uk and http://www.ome.uk.com/.

In making its recommendations, the STRB was asked to review the current provisions for teachers’ pay and consider;

how the pay framework for teachers should best be made more market facing in local areas;

how the pay scales, including the main and upper pay scales, should be reformed to more effectively link pay and performance, including arrangements for progression;

what other reforms should be made to teachers’ pay and conditions in order to raise the status of the profession and best support the recruitment and retention of high-quality teachers in all schools.

I am grateful for the careful consideration which the STRB has given to these important matters. I am inviting comments on the STRB’s report and my response to its recommendations by 4 January 2013.

The STRB has recommended:

Replacement of increments based on length of service by differentiated progression through the main pay scale to reward excellence and performance improvement.

Extension to all teachers of pay progression linked to annual appraisal (which is already established for more senior teachers). Appraisal should be against a single set of teaching standards, and individual objectives, with a strong emphasis on professional development.

Abolition of mandatory pay points within the pay scales for classroom teachers, to enable individual pay decisions, but with retention at present of points for reference only in the main pay scale, to guide career expectations for entrants to the profession.

Retention of a broad national framework, including the higher pay bands for London and fringe areas and an upper pay scale as a career path for experienced teachers who make a wider contribution to the school.

Replacement of the unnecessarily detailed threshold test for progression from the main to the upper pay scale, with simple criteria based on one set of teacher standards. This will create a consistent progression path from graduate entry to the top of the upper pay scale and allow schools to promote the best teachers more rapidly.

Local flexibility for schools to create posts paying salaries above the upper pay scale, enabling some of the very best teachers to remain in the classroom and lead the improvement of teaching skills.

More discretion for schools in the use of allowances for recruitment and retention and freedom to pay fixed-term responsibility allowances of up to £2,500 a year for time-limited projects.

Reinforcement of the responsibility of head teachers to manage staff and resources and of governing bodies to hold school leaders to account for managing and rewarding the performance of teachers in the interests of pupils.

On the basis of the above, a much simplified “School Teachers’ Pay and Conditions” document, including a brief guide to the national framework and the flexibilities open to schools.

I am grateful to the STRB for its consideration of the issues and, subject to consultees’ views, I intend to accept all these key recommendations in full. I regard these recommendations as providing the framework to move towards a more flexible and simpler system, where the emphasis is on pay progression related to performance and greater autonomy for schools in deciding how to reward their teachers. I particularly support the aim of enabling the best teachers to be promoted more quickly than is currently the case and rewarded accordingly. I note the STRB’s comments about these recommendations representing a first stage of reform and that they would welcome an opportunity to consider other issues, including leadership pay and teachers’ conditions, in a subsequent remit. I intend to issue a further remit to the STRB next year to ask for their advice about how to implement the 1% pay uplift for the two years following the end of the pay freeze. The statutory minima and maxima for classroom teachers’ pay will be uprated by 1% in each year 2013-14 and 2014-15. Schools are free to determine the extent of pay uplifts to teachers within the statutory minima and maxima, and will be able to provide an uplift of 1%, in line with any overall uplift in pay in the public sector, if they so choose.

The STRB has also further recommended:

The retention, for now, of the four geographical pay bands as the starting point for recognising broad labour market differences which bear widely on recruitment and retention.

Differentiated performance-based progression on the main pay scale to enable teachers to progress at different speeds, with higher rewards and more rapid progression for the most able teachers.

More flexible performance-based progression to and within the upper pay scale, assessed against substantially simplified criteria, enabling abolition of the bureaucratic post threshold standards.

Local discretion to pay a higher salary to the most successful teachers (akin to AST) if such a post is required and meets simple yet demanding criteria on leading improvement of teaching skills.

No change to the core TLR provisions already in the STPCD.

Fixed-term TLRs for time-limited projects, with non-safeguarded payments in a range between £500 and £2,500 per annum.

Removal of the three-year time limit for recruitment and retention, subject to a formal review by the school of all awards on a regular basis.

The Department communicate clearly to schools the scope for them to make greater use of existing discretionary recruitment and retention payments available under paragraph 50 of the STPCD to respond to local market needs, including case-study examples of good practice.

The Department prepare a much simpler document for publication in autumn 2013.

In addition, the STRB has made a number of consequential recommendations:

No obligation for schools when recruiting to match a teacher’s existing salary on either the main or the upper pay scales.

The requirement for two consecutive successful appraisals for progression purposes on the upper pay scale be discontinued.

The existing post-threshold, AST and ET standards be abolished.

The AST pay spine and ET pay range be discontinued.

Again, subject to consultees’ views, I intend to accept all these detailed and consequential recommendations. I believe that these represent a significant step in the process of reform and provide the scope for further flexibility at a later stage. For instance, I welcome the recommendations in respect of teaching and learning responsibility payments and recruitment and retention allowances, but would want to ask the STRB to revisit the whole area of allowances in a future remit.

Finally, the STRB has made a number of recommendations about implementation. It has recommended:

The existing points on the main pay scale should become purely reference points.

The Department consider how to give effect to the detailed recommendations on implementation, including:

A clear expectation of progression to the maximum of the main pay scale, subject to good performance;

An option for no progression without the automatic implication of capability proceedings;

Progression to reference point M2 for NQTs on successful completion of the induction period;

All pay progression to be dependent on a written recommendation based on timely completion of an annual performance appraisal in line with the pay policy of a school.

The Department develop guidance or a tool-kit to help schools develop systematic and transparent local approaches to pay progression.

A basic eligibility requirement for teachers applying for the upper pay scale, who must be highly competent classroom teachers who have already progressed substantially towards the maximum of the main scale.

Criteria for access to the upper pay scale requiring candidates to have demonstrated:

Substantial and sustained achievement of objectives, appropriate skills and competence in all elements of the teachers’ standards; and

Potential and commitment to undertake professional duties which make a wider contribution (which involves working with adults) beyond their own classroom.

On the upper pay scale, the amount and timing of any progression recommendations should be at the school’s discretion, reflecting individuals’ differential contributions to the school.

School discretion to create a post for a teacher whose primary purpose is the modelling and leading improvement of teaching skills. Such posts should have a salary range fixed within the range between £37,461 and £56,950 (nationally), taking account of the challenge of the post and of internal pay relativities, with progression increases entirely dependent upon performance.

Discretion for schools to set salaries within the unqualified teachers’ scale without reference points and with performance based progression.

I broadly accept these recommendations in principle. I am however clear that the Department will need to consider further how best to implement the STRB’s key recommendations and that it would be helpful to discuss the details with other parties before reaching firm conclusions that the STRB’s proposals represent the most effective approach. For instance, we may wish to give further consideration to the appropriate criteria for eligibility to the upper pay scale. A requirement to have made substantial progress towards the maximum of the main scale could perhaps seem an unnecessary barrier if we are seeking to enable the best teachers to progress more rapidly. We will also need to ensure that we consider equalities issues as part of the process of implementing the recommendations and I will want to seek consultees’ views on these issues as well.